Guess this maybe not a very 'one army' post, but where do our loyalties lie.

My own sub unit is going through a merger and loyalties are all over the place. Maybe its similar to the numerous Londons threads on this site, one group sticking to their territorial history and the others abandoning it.

4RGJ had two VC's, London Scots 2, 5RGJ 2......... if my memory serves me right. Considering that TA units only ever expanded into 2 or 3 Bn's (compared to dozens for regular regiments) and only served in 2 major conflicts I would say when it comes to VC's the TA was on par with their regular comrades.

I expect it depends how closely you can identify with that history. If there is a 'pure' lineage to a clearly identifiable heritage then it is perhaps more of a loyalty. As has been expressed in the Gunner thread people seem to have a loyalty to their batteries, and are proud of their identity as 'Gunners' but the individual regiments mean less. There is clearly a paralell with the TA Corps or Big regiments, where people see loyalty to their sub unit and wider Corps, but have little, or less, loyalty to a regiment shose footprint might be 200 miles.

I expect it depends how closely you can identify with that history. If there is a 'pure' lineage to a clearly identifiable heritage then it is perhaps more of a loyalty. As has been expressed in the Gunner thread people seem to have a loyalty to their batteries, and are proud of their identity as 'Gunners' but the individual regiments mean less. There is clearly a paralell with the TA Corps or Big regiments, where people see loyalty to their sub unit and wider Corps, but have little, or less, loyalty to a regiment shose footprint might be 200 miles.

Click to expand...

Very true and I would of thought that this was more relevent in a TA independent uint that only sees it regiment in whole a few times a year